Is Apple falling behind itself in the innovation game?

A  version of this post, including early reactions from Asia, appeared first in VentureBeat

I agree, having a title like that on a day Steve Jobs introduced what is arguably “Apple’s greatest” device is debatable. But nevertheless, today’s unveiling of the iPad begs that question. While the iPad undoubtedly has top-of-the-line hardware, and a ready content/application ecosystem to feed on, however, does that mean Apple has genuinely innovated in creating a device category that can potentially rescue the legions of traditional media players? Or does it mean that Apple has created a device that can move an entire content stream from other devices/screens on to the iPad? I don’t believe so.

Innovation begins where conventional thinking ends. With the iphone, Apple had done just that. They questioned the fundamental thinking of handset vendors on why keypads should be there, on why compelling third-party applications can’t be built easily, and many more. However, with the iPad, Apple appears to have fallen for the trap of sticking to conventions and building products that do more of the same. True, the iPad indeed boasts a variety of features, targeted at e-book readers, regular content-viewing consumers, and ‘business’ consumers (although I am highly skeptical if we are going to see too many people suited up and using iWork on the iPad).  Apple has also thrown in a 3G radio and sewn-up a flat-rate data plan with its long-time partner, AT&T. But somewhere, all of these bells and whistles fall short.

Apple's iPad adopts a position that is confusing, both to the industry observer and the consumer. While the Kindle and the iPod tried to push consumers to adopt different screens/devices for different needs, the iPad, by attempting to do bits of everything, runs the risk of falling into a no-man's land! For instance, consider its suggested role as a netbook replacement. You cannot run regular Mac OS X apps! And lack of multitasking means users cannot perform basic netbook-style activities such as having a twitter client open whilst streaming music from an online radio. The lack of a camera is also likely to flummox consumers who would expect a $600+ mobile browsing device to allow video-conferencing. And finally, despite the high-end 1 GHz processor that the iPad boasts of, Flash is still off-limits for iPad users, stunting the overall browsing experience. Similarly, take its comparison to a portable high-res media player. The device lacks widescreen display, and you can't connect it to your large-screen TV. 

For more, consider its role as an evolved music player. You're stuck with the amount of memory you opt for, no expandable memory slots for you. Its positioning as a gaming device is probably the only thing that makes sense. Social gaming apps are likely to get a shot in the arm with this category. However, serious gaming remains a big if. Such hazy positioning makes for a potent combo when one takes the pricing of the device into consideration. Although it might start at $499, once you add 3G capability, a 3G data plan (the $15 plan for 250MB from AT&T is a joke for this kind of a device) and the keyboard, and suddenly even the entry-level iPad looks much pricier. Beyond the consumer, Apple also runs the risk of cannibalizing sales of its profitable Mac lines. 

Apple has historically shown that it has been ahead of the innovation curve, atleast in the decade gone by. Starting with the iPod, the iPhone, and the Macs, and the ever-neglected Apple TV, Apple products have always been known for going the extra mile in building innovative solutions for consumer challenges and in the process, profitable business lines for themselves. However, with the iPad, all I see is a product that does a little of many things, a product that tries to build on past glory (not necessarily a bad thing) and most importantly, a product that is representative of other technology companies and not Apple.

Make no mistake, the iPad will likely sell in strong numbers. It might strike it rich in some of the Western Europe markets as well, but as for as I am concerned, this is a step back for the innovative company that I have admired for long.

India Telecoms : Storm Before the Calm?

That might very well seem to sum up the current happenings in the Indian mobile market. Rapid growth in the past couple of years has seen the entry of a host of new players into the market, and more are set to enter in the coming months. Indeed, the attractiveness of the market can be gauged by the fact that even at this late stage, where there are 10+ operators for each circle, more operators are reportedly interested in making an entry in to the market. It's a different matter that the cost of entry might be much lower than what other global telcos have had to cough up, given the significant noise associated with the prospective target, Datacom and the consequent delay in launching services.

However, all is not well with the Indian mobile market. Rise in competition, coupled with a rapid dis-proportionate decline in industry revenues, is pinching the incumbents hard, while the new entrants appear to have resigned themselves to a long battle. The current price war, triggered by the new entrant into GSM Tata DoCoMo with its per second pulse plan, has forced other operators to follow suit. In the process, mobile tariffs, that were already significantly low compared to other emerging market peers, sank. However, unlike the past, the elasticity appeared missing. Declining tariffs had led to significant uptick in usage in the past. However, latest results of listed telcos indicate that the usage is flattening, and more worryingly, showing signs of decline. And we are not yet done with launch of all operators. Some of the operators with pan-India rollout license are yet to do so, and there still remains the threat of newer larger global players. And let's not forget the fact that 3G license auctions are yet to be done, and despite the limited spectrum on offer, many expect atleast one more new global player to enter the market.

Does all this mean that the great Indian mobile opportunity is lost?  I don't believe so. The current market scenario where there are 10+ operators in a given circle cannot sustain itself. Hyper-competition, whilst good for the consumer in the short-term, results in creating tariff wars with seemingly bottom-less levels. Players with deep pockets and a genuine interest in the market over the long-term will battle it out, and survive. Non-serious players that entered the market looking at it as a get-rick-quick geography will increasingly find their hands tied and will exit, sooner, if not later. Indeed, the present storm appears to forebode a period of consolidation in the Indian mobile market.

Google's risky attempt to rewrite the carrier-customer relation

Google has finally decided to put its weight behind phones that ostensibly represent their vision of a smartphone, making for a, er, Superphone. The Nexus One in many ways, has been viewed by many as a response from Google to take on Apple in its (now) own backyard, the high-end smartphone. While Google has indeed made a strong effort to meet the expectations of its own fanboys, by coming up with what many claim to be the best implementation of Android, however, in the process, Google is also attempting rewrite the traditional rules of the mobile industry in the US. In a market where carriers have historically held an iron grip over the consumers, and any other stakeholder in the value chain, (including device vendors, content creators, app developers) was kept on a tight leash, by opening up its own distribution channel, and encouraging people to buy directly, the company is attempting to break the nexus between carriers and device vendors.

For long, the US mobile market has grown on a diet prescribed by the carriers, that had made it extremely difficult for handset vendors to directly take a device to the market. With rampant handset subsidies, device vendors were left with little chance of trying to engage directly with consumers who were happy paying a fraction of the device cost upfront. While multiple others have also attempted to go direct to the consumer, however, few had the weight of a large player such as Google. Lacking the presence of an iTunes-like ecosystem, and a handset-presence, Google is now trying to create alternate channels to carriers and in the process displace them from their 'hallowed' position. By making it clear that it is going to only showcase a limited number of handsets on its channel, Google is making it amply clear that they now want to take the position occupied by the carrier in terms of driving device specifications, and now, tightly integrated applications.

The initial uptake might have been low, but this move is not really about one handset or of the resultant margins. Combine the Android marketplace, with Google Voice and Gizmo5, and a direct distribution channel to customer that's free of carrier-interference, and you are increasingly looking at the prospect of Google creating AND monetizing several over-the-top services and in the process bypassing the carriers completely.

All these moves are however, not without their more than adequate share of risk. Google's pseudo-entry into the handset space will prove quite uncomfortable with its handset partners that decided to latch on to the Android bandwagon. The fact that the Nexus One used the latest Android version before it was made available as an SDK will definitely not be lost on its partners. And by declaring that only select 'superphones' will be retailed through Google's online channel, the company runs the risk of negatively impacting sales of Android 'smart' phones that it has deemed not worthy of the 'super' tag!

Google sure has embarked on a pothole ridden path to controlling the customer relation on the mobile platform. It has its task cut out if it is to emerge unscathed, without antagonizing its partners, whilst hoping to significantly change consumer behavior.

In the Battle for Online Identity, Privacy is the Casualty

Content consumption on the Internet is rapidly becoming mainstream. Given the increasing amount of content that is moving online, and the dis-proportionate influence that online services are having on our day-to-day lives, Internet based companies are in a race to have a ringside view of our online behavior. And what better way to obtain such data than to be the gatekeeper to the web. It is in this context that leading players such as Facebook, Twitter and Google are trying to push their 'connect' products, or so to say, reach extenders. These single-sign-on applications help websites across the web significantly cut down on the efforts required by a casual browser to interact with them, whilst providing Facebook & Co with a goldmine of usage data. While companies such as Facebook will market this as a manner of enhanced utility for the consumer, however, the truth remains that control and knowledge of usage behavior online is indeed going to be a key determinant of online success. As it is, targeted advertising on Facebook is taking advertising to hitherto virgin territory. On the mobile platform, Google is attempting to become this gatekeeper that offers 'open' access into which only the company has 'closed' access. Its recent acquisition of Admob now ensures that Google has a ringside view in to consumer behavior on this emerging platform. 

Facebook has already embarked on a monetization path of user data. The recent about-turn that Facebook did with respect to user privacy settings marks the beginning of a change that is likely to become more prevalent across the web. While most major online players have thus far resisted the allure of making user data public, Facebook's stance marks a major shift for the Internet as we have known. For, the company's changes impact over 350 million people directly. And despite what the folks at Facebook would have you believe, the question over how much privacy is 'enough' privacy has yet to be answered clearly by the consumer. The fact that consumers are sharing more and more personal info does not mean that everyone wants it to be revealed to a global audience. Likewise, the increasing social nature of the web  and the rise of conversational media can hardly be an excuse for Facebook or other online players to reset established privacy rules. The sad part is, revealing personal info and looking at monetizing them through search is the easy way out. If Facebook or other social networks indeed wish to remain relevant over the long term, they should probably spend more time in creating alternate business models.


As our day-to-day lives and our online personas start intertwining and integrating more often, with usage of smartphone applications, we can only expect more such developments. Facebook might have been the first, but they definitely wont be the last ! 

Mobile Internet, the Morgan Stanley Version

Mary Meeker & Co at Morgan Stanley are back at it again....Trying to replicate what they achieved nearly 14 years ago with The Internet Report, the analysts at Morgan Stanley are back at doing what they do best. Sticking their neck out and trying to identify trends that could mark the advent of the next big business in the tech industry. And what better time could they pick than end-2009, when the tech community is drinking Apple's Kool-aid like there's no tomorrow, when Google has apparently decided to go high-street retail with their self-branded phone, when a mobile social network raises more money in under 12 weeks of existence than what a 90 year-old magazine is sold for! Indeed, just when the contours of a bubble around mobile are beginning to emerge, such reports sure will help increase awareness of a space that continues to show strong growth. Neverthless, signs of a bubble not withstanding, the mobile Internet sure is likely to spawn a whole parallel industry to the PC based Internet. As networks grow in capacity, and devices grow in capabilities, and developers in creativity, we are likely to find that the mobile Internet is probably making to make a significantly more impact on our day-to-day lives than the PC based Internet, and in the process, also create new leaders and winners. The mobile Internet sure is big, but will it also necessarily go thro' a bubble before settling down?

The report is definitely worth a good read. You can find the executive summary embedded below and the two reports after the break. Be advised though, they are bulky.

Morgan Stanley-Mobile Internet Report-Exec Summary-Dec 2009

View more documents from Subrahmanyam KVJ.

Is a Smartphone Bubble Building Up?

The signs are getting clear by the day. What started off as a category created by a blockbuster product, is today being heralded as the savior of the mobile handset industry. Correction, the mobile industry in itself. Smartphones, and I am referring to the genre that has unleashed itself post the advent of the iPhone, have seen a smart uptick in sales in recent years. Driven by significant carrier subsidies in the US and elsewhere, and a renewed focus on mobile applications, this category has rapidly gained, both in user acceptance, and in industry attention.

Indeed, for the first time in years, smartphones, coupled with an open mobile ecosystem where customers are not bound by walled gardens, are helping in creating an industry of their own with stakeholders as varied as advertisers, ad networks, mobile developers, and others. Of course, the carriers and the handset vendors still figure in the equation, however, they appear to be increasingly dis-intermediated by either large Internet players such as Google or by innovative device entrants such as Apple, who have successfully recreated walled gardens of a different type. While all of this portends great for the consumer, however, the manner in which the hype is building up in the smartphone space, dominated by discussions over mobile applications, makes one wonder if there is indeed a bubble that's building up, across two of the important elements of this value chain, applications and devices.

The mobile applications space refuses to show signs of any letdown in activity. First it was the spate of announcements over mobile application store launches, and now the focus appears to be on other enablers of the value chain such as ad networks. Apple's App Store sure has seen a couple of billion downloads and a catalog of over 100,000 applications, however, the marginal utility of an ever-increasing number of apps is highly debatable. And not to be outdone, Google's Android marketplace has over 10,000 applications already. Which begs the question, how much is enough? For the consumers, discoverability becomes a huge hurdle, while for the developers, the ecosystem is beginning to act as a strong black hole. Sure there are AAA app developers who've struck it rich, but then, like in the case of any other content businesses, it is only a few apps that hit the jackpot. However, the mobile apps business sure is showing no signs of acknowledging this fact. To add to the overall confusion, multiple versions (Android 1, 1.5 and now 2.0!) of OS platforms are currently out in the market simultaneously, which has significant potential to alientate customers that can't figure out why a specific app is working on their friend's Android phone and not theirs. Yet, device vendors continue to create platforms to attract developers, Samsung's Bada being the latest to join the bandwagon. And with increasing apps, comes the realization of the need for monetization. And this is where ad networks like Admob hit paydirt. Their acquisition for $750 Mn is indeed seen as a validation of the potential of the mobile advertising space, and of course, without underplaying any of the value that in-app usage data that Google gets along.

On the device side, Apple continues to see rising sales. Forecasts are now coming in on how smartphones will likely make up for the bulk of handset sales 18 months from now! Players like Sony Ericsson and Motorola have kind of decided to go away from their low-cost handset focus and invest more on high-end smartphones. And we have even more new entrants in to the smartphone space. Dell, which has been on the fence for quite a while, has finally decided to take the plunge and is launching its smartphone in two of the world's largest emerging markets of Brazil and China. Android is now in to V2, with the Motorola Droid appearing to get early traction.

Rapid growth in any industry segment is always welcome. It indicates that there is significant previously unmet customer demand that newer products are meeting. However, the risk of such rapid growth lies in the possibility of over-the-top exuberance when it comes to estimating future growth. As a wise man once said, most forecasts are over-estimated in the short-term and under-estimated in the long term. Smartphones and mobile applications appear to fit this bill. One can only hope that the current hyper-growth phase is also likely to act as a natural shakeup with the result being fewer smartphone platforms, more open standards for mobile application development, an ecosystem that offers genuine revenue prospects for developers, ad networks, and advertisers, and most importantly, a top-notch customer experience, rather than morph itself in to an uncontrollable bubble.

Update 1: It didn't take long for the next major announcement in smartphones. Techcrunch's quoting unnamed sources that claim Google is close to launching its own smartphone ! Highly doubtful why they want to do that, given manufacturers are already making a beeline to adopt Android. Would Google want to compete with its partners? And more importantly, can Google ensure rapid adoption of its services through its own phone, as opposed to collaborating through the Android ecosystem. Nevertheless, up goes the hype curve !

VoIP Redux

VoIP is back in to the big league, and who else to be in the spotlight, other than Skype! Skype has been the poster child for the VoIP brigade for quite a few years now. However, most, including me, were disappointed to see Skype find its way into eBay, for there were evidently very little synergies. Indeed, one could vividly recall some of the rather wierd monetization options that eBay could conjure up for Skype, including one in which they considered selling ringtones for Skype calls ! Finally, it appears to have dawned on eBay after over four years that they are better off focussing on their core auctions and e-commerce enablement area (the irony wasn't lost on anyone on how eBay had paid significantly less for PayPal). Nevertheless, to eBay's credit, it has let the company quietly grow in to a potent service that is now looking at hitting a $1 Bn revenue run rate and clocks over 2 Bn paid minutes. What is interesting is that eBay has retained a stake in the company, and the surprise entrants back in to the company are the original (ruthless?) entrepreneur duo who founded Skype.

However, more than the intricacies of how the deal is structured, the deal and its size throws the spotlight back on the VoIP industry. Despite its immense potential, VoIP hasn't really take off in a manner befitting. While Skype has seen success with consumers, however, the real challenge, and the big monies, lie in encouraging enterprises to sign up. The VoIP space is beginning to see renewed traction with competition in consumer VoIP picking up. Nimbuzz recently launched its paid calling service, 'creatively' called Nimbuzzout. Google's Voice service, while not being a full-fledged VoIP service, however, lays bare the Internet giant's intentions for this space. And with rumors flying around of Google's acquisition of Gizmo5, one can be rest assured of a shakeup in the VoIP industry. On the carrier side as well, there appears to be some movement. AT&T has decided to allow VoIP calls over 3G, a point of much contention when Skype for the iPhone was released.While carriers around the world have agreed on the One Voice standard making all future mobile calls VoIP, however, full-scale LTE deployment is a while away.

VoIP, and more so mobile VoIP, appears poised for an interesting future. Having come in to mainstream when mobile ecosystems were tightly closed and , mobile VoIP has historically been limited in its ability. However, recent developments which are progressively breaking down carrier walls, opening up of operator APIs and creation of innovative platforms, such as the one offered by BT's Ribbit, create the potential for an exciting and innovative future.

Update 1: The current spate of action in this space ain't done yet, apparently. Techcrunch is reporting on a possible acquisition of Jajah, and for a change, we finally have a telco in the fray.

Update 2: The news about Google acquiring Gizmo5 indeed turned out to be true. Should be quite interesting to see how Google Voice evolves, now that they have access to a strong SIP platform and a PSTN termination link. More importantly, the prospect of a communications platform that integrates IM, Mobile, Location and uses SIP as the backbone indeed opens up exciting possibilities for realizing the unfulfilled dreams of unified communication. Telcos, watch out!

This Apple Defies Newton's Laws

The title sure seems apposite when viewed in light of Apple's latest quarterly results. Despite the all-round depressed economic environment, and declining consumer spend on TME products and services, Apple has managed to drive both top-line and bottom-line growth significantly. That such stellar results have come in what is usually considered a soft quarter of the year is testament to the twin growth engines of Macs and iPhones. With the iPhone having established itself as the benchmark in the smartphone space, and Macs increasingly finding mainstream acceptance, Apple now appears to be setting sights on creating future revenue streams.

In this backdrop, it is interesting to see how Apple is increasingly using content to create and sustain its future growth. While the iPhone with its staggering 100 K+ apps (leaving aside the quality/quantity debate) forms a key part of Apple's long-term competitive edge in the smartphone space, its attempts to use the iTunes platform as the gateway for digital content into the home merits a deeper look.

Recent reports indicate that Apple is now negotiating with TV networks on introducing a monthly subscription product. The idea being that for an amount of ~$30, consumers could get access to TV content through iTunes. Internet TV is steadily raising its profile, with the rising success of Hulu. However, treating it at par with traditional TV platforms is some time away. Broadcasters and cablecos have begun to feel threatened over such over the top services. However, Apple's entry has the potential to raise the stakes and enhance the reach of Internet TV services. Unlike a Hulu, which is largely viewed on PC (forgetting the Rokus of the world), the prospect of using iTunes as the enabling platform, as opposed to a device, poses a tricky situation for the TV networks. In putting iTunes as its front. Apple's leaving the door open for a device-agnostic future, where content can be viewed/purchased on PC/mobile/E-book/Netbook/what-have-you. With a rising interest from both device vendors and software players in embedding applications directly into next-generation large-screen TVs, the prospect of Apple embedding iTunes in to a TV doesn't sound that much more preposterous. Now compare this offering from Apple with that of a traditional operator like Comcast. And suddenly, Comcast's digital TV offerings sound obscene with monthly rentals of over $60! And yes, out goes the "TV Everywhere" initiative as well, given the fact that it requires customers to have a regular cable subscription in order to view the content on PC.

iTunes has had a more than significant role in hastening the demise of the traditional music labels, with its a la carte pricing model. If Apple is able to bring a similar proposition to the TV space, that could significantly impact cablecos who thrive on creating bundles and where a host of also-rans piggyback on one or two premium channels. Of course, there is the key issue of one of the large networks actually signing up with Apple, but it is more likely a question of when and not if anymore. Internet TV of course has still to better its overall user experience, given the significant bandwidth requirements, and the renewed debate in US and other developed economies on metering usage. And there's also the issue of shifting consumers to a different screen other than the TV. However, Apple does have a dark horse in there in the form of its relatively-neglected Apple TV line of products. A la carte pricing of TV channels, and a more robust Apple TV can precisely replicate Apple's success in the music business in TV content. And Apple's success is defined not by the margins that it is making in its music sales, but by the strong vertical control that it has over the customer experience, including billing and provisioning. Music labels who initially treated iTunes as just another distribution platform are now realizing that the middleman (Apple) today exerts more influence over the consumer, than them. Video could be the next market.

Economy and Internet Trends Presentation

Mary Meeker from Morgan Stanley comes up with a data-rich presentation every year at the Web 2.0 summit. Some of the panels from this year's presentation are pretty telling. For instance, the massive drop in mobile Internet traffic to operator portals! True indeed, mobile is going to play an increasing role in the lives of consumers, and location adds the ideal topping. Mobile broadband is likely to hit its inflection point in developed countries, and find its feet in emerging markets in the coming year. Social network sites are rapidly replacing horizontal portals as the landing pages and walled gardens appear set to be relegated to being a relic of the past.

Check out the complete presentation below.

Economy & Internet Trends - Morgan Stanley Presentation

View more presentations from kvjs.

Internet Radio: Fresh Breath of Life or Last Nail in Coffin

The recent agreement between SoundExchange and various online streaming companies begs the question whether webcasters can now heave a sigh of relief or if it is time for them to down their shutters. The music industry has been in a tailspin for a while with the demise of the CD, and the rise of snacking. Add music piracy, and increased consumer demand for DRM-free music, and you have an industry that is increasingly looking at a black hole. No wonder then, that the current agreement is being viewed in many channels as a victory for the music industry. A way to monetize what is increasingly being seen as the future of music.

While the specific terms of the deal in themselves are highly skewed against smaller webcasters, what with a minimum $25,000 guaranteed payout, it has not given large streaming players such as Pandora a free hand. An immediate visible step that Pandora took has been to cap the number of free hours of listening down to 40, bringing its freemium model into play. While that may offer the solution for the short-term, however, the moot point is, whether this whole debate realizes and recognizes the direction that digital music is taking. Music has been one of the earliest content categories to be impacted significantly by digitization, with the high-priced high-margin physical music falling out of favor with consumers. Rise of media players such as the iPod together with the iTunes ecosystem also hastened the demise of the CD. Now, the same thing seems all set to repeat in the space of a few years. Music labels are increasingly looking at online streaming as the next cash cow, and current pricing levels appear to be pointing towards that direction. Evidence such as those coming from Sweden where labels are making more money from Spotify, than from iTunes, are clear indicators of the future of the music industry.

Rising penetration of mobile devices, coupled with high-speed wireless networks, present a market that is potentially larger than any of the earlier music consuming markets. Working with Internet and telecom players in creating compelling music streaming services, and ramping up uptake of streaming by consumers is the need of the hour. Indeed, evidence is also coming in of how streaming not only has the potential to reduce piracy, but on the contrary, lead to increased consumption of physical music. The music industry could do well to look at Internet streaming in a more holistic way, than just as another revenue stream where they need to adopt a skimming strategy. Whether the recent agreement represents a rising of the phoenix from the ashes or a step towards a pyrrhic victory for the music industry is something that will be keenly seen.